ENVIRONMENT FOOD AND RURAL AFFAIRS

Pesticide Spraying

Alun Michael: I have now completed a detailed consideration of the outcome of two consultation exercises regarding the introduction of buffer zones and information on pesticide use. As a result I would like to announce a number of measures designed to provide additional reassurance about the pesticide regulatory process, and to improve public access to information about pesticides used.
	First I would like to announce that the royal commission on environmental pollution has agreed to my request to carry out a special study to examine the scientific evidence on which DEFRA has based its decisions on the risks to people from pesticide exposure.
	I requested this study following a detailed evaluation of the responses made to the two public consultations launched on 21 July 2003, which sought views on the introduction of buffer zones around residential properties near farms, and how residents can best be informed of the pesticides that are being sprayed.
	My number one priority has always been to ensure that the safety arrangements we have in place for pesticides do the job of protecting the public. The independent scientific advice I have received, both from the independent Advisory Committee on Pesticides and DEFRA's chief scientific adviser, is very clear that the existing system provides full reassurance. I am confident that no new scientific evidence has come to light that would provide a safety based justification for buffer zones, and I have therefore decided against their introduction around agricultural land.
	Nevertheless the responses to the consultations demonstrate that there is a perception that the current arrangements, and in particular the assessment of risks, are inadequate. I have listened to the concerns of campaigners who hold strong views about how crop spraying has affected their health. Their views are undoubtedly sincerely held and although no new scientific evidence was produced to support their case, I believe the time is now right for a fresh and independent appraisal of the science. This is why I have asked the royal commission to examine the scientific evidence on which the regulatory system is based. The commission will be free to take a new and independent approach to the question. Further details about the scope and management of the royal commission's study will be released in due course.
	I have also decided to introduce new legal measures requiring farmers and growers to keep records of pesticides used on crops and to make those records available to the public via a third party. Officials are contacting general practitioners' and lawyers' representatives and those for community health councils to explore whether they would act as third party representatives in such cases. These measures are at the early stage of development, and will require changes to existing pesticide regulations to put them into effect. I will bring forward proposals for parliamentary consideration at the earliest opportunity.
	In parallel, a pilot study will be set up to explore how residents living next to farms can be notified in advance of pesticide use. The study will look at the practicality and cost of various options for how notification can take place. Officials are working on the terms of reference for the study and further details will be published as soon as practical.
	These measures are in addition to a biomonitoring study already being arranged to look at the effect of pesticides in the air. There is also an on-going study, co-ordinated by the working group on risk assessment of mixtures of pesticides (WIGRAMP) into the effect of numbers of pesticides used in combination.
	I also intend to invite key stakeholders to a meeting in the near future to explain the reasoning behind the decisions made.

DEFENCE

Defence Vetting Agency

Adam Ingram: The business review of the defence vetting process has been completed. The review team has made a number of recommendations and observations, which Director General (security and safety) has agreed and endorsed, and as the senior responsible officer will oversee the implementation strategy.
	The key findings of the review are that the rationalisation of the former defence vetting organisations has been successful, providing both economies and efficiencies in the vetting process and offering opportunities for further performance enhancement and business expansion. The Defence Vetting Agency (DVA) has achieved the prime aim required by its framework document and become an integrated and cohesive organisation. Standardised procedures for defence vetting have been adopted by the agency, which has successfully consolidated the majority of the disparate processes previously used within the separate service vetting organisations. The organisation is correctly sized to deliver its required output and over the period 1997–98 to 2002–03 has reduced its net operating costs from £11 million to £9.6 million, with the staff component reducing by £1.8 million.
	The review also concluded that the DVA should remain a defence agency and, as the largest UK vetting organisation, is well placed to extend its services to a wider range of other Government Departments, if required.
	I have arranged for copies of the report of the business review to be placed in the Libraries of both Houses.
	Key targets have now been set for the chief executive of the DVA for the financial year 2004–05. Building upon the progress made since it formed in 1997, these incremental targets will help the agency to become much more responsive to its customers, and be well placed to move towards carrying out security clearances more quickly, without any loss of quality.
	Quality
	Key Target 1:
	Through external validation, achieve at least a 95 per cent. success rating with specially selected cases, and achieve zero serious errors that should have been identified at the time of vetting.
	Key Target 2:
	To complete 33 per cent. of the three-year security check and developed vetting backlog review programme.
	Timeliness
	Key Target 3:
	To improve the completion time of routine cases to:
	(a) 62 per cent. of counter terrorist checks completed within 30 calendar days.
	(b) 65 per cent. of security checks completed within 30 calendar days.
	(c) 50 per cent. of developed vetting completed within 100 calendar days.
	Key Target 4:
	To improve the completion time of priority cases to:
	(a) 45 per cent. of priority counter terrorist and security check cases completed within 10 calendar days.
	(b) 90 per cent. of priority developed vetting completed within 30 calendar days.
	Key Target 5:
	To achieve average completion times of:
	(a) 30 calendar days for counter terrorist checks.
	(b) 30 calendar days for security checks.
	(c) 100 calendar days for developed vetting.
	Efficiency
	Key Target 6:
	To reduce the unit cost of output by 2 per cent.
	I have arranged for advance copies of the DVA corporate plan to be placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

TRADE AND INDUSTRY

Desulphurisation Plant (Aberthaw Power Station)

Stephen Timms: I have today granted consent under Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989 to RWE Innogy plc for the construction of a flue gas desulphurisation plant at the 1,500 MW coal-fired power station at Aberthaw in the Vale of Glamorgan. Planning permission for the plant has also been deemed to be granted, subject to 29 planning conditions agreed with the Vale of Glamorgan council.
	Copies of the press notice and decision letter are being placed in the Library of the House.